jerryskids

"Claim to be," LOL, what's it like to hate your people so much? Also: I don't know the source or if Qatar was in on it. Interesting name for the source though. Also: Trump warned Hamas on September 7th that this was the last offer, and that Israel had accepted the terms. Hamas, predictably, turned it down. Yesterday, Trump gave Israel the green light. It's about time Qatar got some skin in this game, other than funding terrorism with their oil money.

Well, I thought your argument involved your primary concern: Trump did not assault American law in this case. In fact, I would argue that the radical judge who disregarded the law is the one assaulting American law. I would also argue that your true primary concern is that Congress has, for a long time, delegated a lot of its constitutional power to unelected orgs under the administrative branch. Congress approves a pile of money for some amorphous use, and let's the "experts" decide how to disburse it. Trump is taking advantage of that structure, in this case to attempt to bully Harvard into changing their behavior. It's an interesting situation, to be sure, and I have mixed feelings about it. On the one hand, it's not practical for Congress to understand all of the technical details needed (even if they were smart and not dummies). On the other hand, how can the courts complain that POTUS doesn't give money to somebody not specifically enumerated?

Well, I cared enough so I looked. I looked for keywords, not just in titles. You said nothing. The only comment I could find, which I mentioned, was a throwaway comment by MDC in a Gulf of Mexico/America sidetrack. I wouldn't have bothered, but you seemed to have a vivid memory of discussing it, and of me NOT discussing it. It seemed odd that you would remember the absence of something so clearly, hence my interest. I also remembering objecting to the Angelou censorship when it happened, so I expected to find evidence of a discussion AND that I had objected to it. But I found nothing either way.

Hmm, that's quite an attack. Unfortunately, a search of you saying "Angelou" or "Mockingbird" comes up bupkis. "Angelou" with no author has one reference to it by MDC in a discussion about renaming the Gulf of Mexico. "Naval" and "Academy" has nothing either. So basically, you are full of shiot that there was a thread on this, let alone that you posted about it. A complete fail whataboutism.

You know there is more cost than defense lawyers, right?

Seems you missed yet another word; I never said Pfizer delayed it. That being said, yeah, Topol was all about safety and not delaying it past the election.

I would agree to a concession that lets Hamas terrorists live if they cede leadership and leave the region, never to return.

I saw Bruce and Billy (separate concerts) for the first time each within a year or so a few years ago. Bruce I think was doing his first concert after a major injury? Anyway, Bruce's performance was better. He played a lot of his older stuff which is more what I like (that's a generally true statement for me and musicians). But I never owned a Springsteen album. I wore the cassettes for Joel's The Stranger and 52nd Street (and Songs in the Attic) to shreds. Not seeing Joel in his prime is one of my musical regrets. I was planning to start a thread on this, but since this one is here... a few weeks ago we watched he Billy Joel documentary "And So It Goes." On HBO Max I think. Anyway, it was absolutely phenomenal. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/billy_joel_and_so_it_goes For me, it's Billy and it's not close.

Which also makes me think... Ducky (whatever his brother's character's name was) always kinda set off my gaydar. I wouldn't be surprised if the two of them went at it.

So sorry to hear. What are the next steps?

Why would I not care about free speech at a college that educates the most SCOTUS and higher court judges?

Sorry, but this seems like a red herring. Did Congress pass a law giving money specifically to Harvard which Trump is defying, yes or no?

Congress passed a specific bill providing aid to Harvard? ChatGPT results: Also, Harvard is "abysmal" regarding free speech. https://www.boston.com/news/local-news/2024/09/05/harvard-comes-in-dead-last-in-nationwide-free-speech-rankings/#:~:text=Harvard has consistently received poor,the 2023 and 2024 findings.

I'm not really following this. Does Harvard have some constitutional right to get taxpayer money?

Glad I picked the Iggles defense in my main money league.

There is actually strong evidence that it was delayed. @TimHauckhas provided the receipts before.

Also, sorry to hear about 29Guests

Give me $20 and it's a deal.

1. I suppose you could just let UNRWA drive the aid right to Hamas and bypass the effort to steal it. This "short-term solution" leaves Hamas in control and able to retool. This is the scenario in which you believe Hamas surrenders control to the UN, who by the way has NOT offered to take control of Gaza. They can't, because Hamas is still in charge. 2. Bless your heart on the 2-state solution. Not that Israel is itching for it now, but for 70 years it's been offered a bunch of times. Whatever terrorist regime runs the warring tribes of Gaza at the time always turns it down. From the river to the sea, it's not just for ignorant college kids you know. Also, Palestinians aren't going anywhere in the region, because no Arab country will take them. Why is that? 3. Childish oppressed/oppressor Leftist rhetoric. Back to #1, with your deep knowledge of history, help me understand how that gets Hamas to surrender.

Maybe it's in the "I've forgotten more history" part of his expertise.

Perhaps you can refresh my memory. And no, "I don't know but not this" is childish at best.

Essentially, yes. I have asked you and the other Hamas apologists here what Israel should do instead, but you can't answer "I don't know, but not this$#!" Crickets.

You said they are a propaganda arm of Israel. In doing so you said they were worse than DropDead.

I didn't ask you to ask me yet another question in your TimHauckian way.

The moderates on this board seem allergic to acknowledging errors.